|
New member Username: ElevenPost Number: 4 Registered: Nov-06 | I've heard raves about Ascends. How are they with home theater? Anyone have a 7.1 Ascend setup? Not much positive about Aperions on this forum, yet there seem to be a lot of positive "professional" reviews. Thankfully, they make it easy to audition, with free shipping both ways. How about Axiom for music? |
|
Platinum Member Username: Project6Post Number: 11457 Registered: Dec-03 | they are all excellent speakers, it is a matter of personal preference at this point. I liked the Axiom over the Ascends but it was a hard decision and the Axioms won out only because I thought they looked better. I also liked the Aperion but there seemed to be something missing so it was taken out of contention. |
|
New member Username: ElevenPost Number: 7 Registered: Nov-06 | Yeah, the appearance of the Ascends leaves a little to be desired, although they do seem to fit a neo-modern industrial minimalist aesthetic. What is your room like? I ask, because others have said Axioms tend to be quite bright, and my room is likely to accentuate that, despite my plans for acoustic treatment. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Project6Post Number: 11458 Registered: Dec-03 | The room is pretty mellow, so to speak. Carpeting and thick drapes and such. I didn't think the Axioms are bright at all. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ElevenPost Number: 11 Registered: Nov-06 | I have hardwood floors, several windows... I'll need to do some work to make it inhabitable for music, I think. With what were you driving the Axioms? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Rysa3Post Number: 14 Registered: Nov-06 | You might wanna demo at the least the center channels from Axiom and Ascend with your sub in your house before you decide on a brand. I think you can return both with an in-home trial of 30 days or something. I find differences in center channels between quality manufacturers to be revealing as well as important to the HT experience. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 4560 Registered: Dec-04 | GC how determined are you about the HT setup? 50/50 importance here? Musicality is a trade-off with HT quite often. IMO, a good musical set-up should cover movies OK, seldom the other way about. Particularly the sub. Either of your stated options would work pretty well for movies, I am under-exposed to Ascend, although I go to their forum now and then. They all seem a happy lot. Your neo-modern industrial minimalistic description is rather apt, way better than butt-ugly. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ElevenPittsburgh, PA USA Post Number: 12 Registered: Nov-06 | I am determined to have excellent musical quality first (including multichannel music), with HT taking the backseat. Please say more about the sub for music vs HT. I do know that pure max output is not necessarily desirable for music... otherwise, didn't realize that a good sub for music might not be good for HT (or vice versa). How is the HSU VTF-3 MK2 for music? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 4566 Registered: Dec-04 | https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/284025.html I dug this up from subs. No postings yet as to the performance of the Carver, I was hoping someone would give it a go. Musicality of subs is subjective, of course, but seamless integration is the Stanley Cup of subdom. For instance, I use the Velodyne dps12 currently. This sub has been around the room, looking for invisibility, and I finally found the spot, facing backwards, beside the stereo presentation stand. I surely feel that a sub from Rel or M&K would make the presentation a little more flexible, but new speakers(trying today) might mitigate the sub's impact. The effect of the sub really can be independant of the function of the mains, please bear in mind I am dealing with stereo. A strong pair can mean no sub at all, depending on music being enjoyed. Some subs have a pass filter to limit the bass to the mains as well. This would not apply to SACD, of course. For the sub question in particular, I suggest you look up David Pannell here, he has accomplished a rare feat, using 2 very different subs in concerto. Jan Vigne helped with that one, I chipped in as well. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ElevenPittsburgh, PA USA Post Number: 13 Registered: Nov-06 | 2 different subs together? Interesting... I'll have to look around... Thanks Nuck. Anyone else with Aperion opinions, relative to Ascend in particular? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jorge59Rio de JaneiroBrasil Post Number: 96 Registered: May-05 | GC, The Ascends look much uglier in the website than they actually are. Before I got mine, I was also concerned with their aesthetics, but now I admit I even find their look "nice". |
|
Bronze Member Username: ElevenPittsburgh, PA USA Post Number: 16 Registered: Nov-06 | Good to hear. I'm just going for acceptable with regards to appearance. I expect the bigger problem with regards to looks of the system will be cables all over the place! Are you running Ascends now, or the B&W 702's you mentioned on the other thread? Or...? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Rysa3Post Number: 18 Registered: Nov-06 | AS an FYI, you can get the AScends custom finsihed, at least you used to be able to. |
|
Gold Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 1050 Registered: May-05 | GC, I've got a 7.1 HT system with Ascend CBM 340 SEs up front and (4) CBM 170s (not SEs) sides and rears and a 340C center. The system is very good for HT and it is pretty decent for music and better than that for multi channel music and music videos. BUT, I don't think you're going to go "WOW" for the sound in stereo, even with a good sub, which I have. I think Nuck is right that if you're looking for music first, I would probably look at a good two channel set-up with a sub that makes me tap my toes to music. You are likely to find it's passable as a HT alternative for now, although you won't get great surround effects. In my case, I finally just decided to separate my systems and I have a separate 2 channel system that I cobbled from older components, but fairly high end older stuff, and it sounds great. Now, the Ascends do their HT thing very well and I'm satisfied with my 2 channel system as well. BTW, I started off in your direction, bought the Ascends, which are decent for music, but the more I played with the system, (upgraded Universal DVD player, upgraded receiver and then went to separates, it just didn't sound as good as I would have liked.) So, several thousand bucks later, I probably would have been better off, for music mind you, if I had started with a good 2 channel system that I liked for music and could expand to HT, if desired although I really think that model just doesn't work as well as 2 separate systems. (I'd ask Art and others who went through my experience to add their thoughts as well.) That lead to some serious listening to some higher end stuff and an idea of the type of 2 channel sound I wanted to achieve, along with a listen to Tim's Emmas. which if you really want to go down the combined HT/stereo road, you should go to the Alegria Audio site and throw Tim's Emmas and Lings into a 7.1 channel mix as well. You can get a side by side listen to a pair of Tim's Emmas and the Ascend 340SEs or 170s, and return the ones you don't like and only be out about $30. Not a bad price to pay if you're trying to narrow the gap. Also, I believe Aperion will give ya a free listen to their products and pay return shipping but you may want to check that out. As for me, I prefer the Ascend sound over the Axioms, which I finally heard at a friend's house and they are brighter than my 170s - which was all I had to compare them to at the time. In the room I had, they would not have worked although my current HT room is more like Bernys so they might have been OK in my current room. My thoughts anyway and good luck. Dave. |
|
Gold Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 1051 Registered: May-05 | One final thought, If your wife or GF is involved in any decision, Tim's Emmas win the "sexy" or "Wife Approved" index over the Ascends IMHO. My wife thought the cherry finish on the Emmas was absolutely beautiful but she, ultimately, was OK with the 170s because I could hide them better, I had already purchased them and I was going to have to resell them, and buy (4) Emmas, which was the end to my "upgrading" I'm afraid. (They are not "ugly" in person but they are minimalistic in the styling sense but blend well in a modern house when mounted on the wall or ceiling. LOL Yeah, she never did really bother to tell which sounded better. Another LOL. Good luck. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ElevenPittsburgh, PA USA Post Number: 26 Registered: Nov-06 | Thanks Dakulis. Very very helpful information and suggestions. Maybe I'll try the Emmas out as well... |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jorge59Rio de JaneiroBrasil Post Number: 97 Registered: May-05 | GC I have Ascends 170 fronts, 340 center and 200 rears and STF-2 sub. It's more than enough for my HT/music usage. If my budget permitted, however, I'd get B&W 705 for stereo. They're in a different league. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 1522 Registered: May-05 | Please cover your ears Dave - Finally! An Ascend owner who admits that a speaker is better than Ascends. What's next? OJ admitting he did it? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 4616 Registered: Dec-04 | No, but saying HOW he would do it, hehehe. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1466 Registered: Jun-05 | Thats,funny,I never thought i would hear or read those words,especially compared to Onix,Paradgim, and B&W the 3 companies Ascend owners generally hate the most,thats hilarious. |
|
Bronze Member Username: GavdawgPost Number: 19 Registered: Nov-06 | I posted last year about the 170 after I tried it myself. I was not fond of it compared to my MMG's. I found the bass wanting (even for the specs), the treble too laid back, and that the presentation overall was flat and boxy. However, I freely admit that I am a planar fan, and that very few speakers pass the "no box" sound to my ears. I love my atoms for what they are, but boxless they aint :-P |
|
Bronze Member Username: GavdawgPost Number: 20 Registered: Nov-06 | I myself would love to find a small speaker, roughly the size of the atoms, maybe a little smaller or larger give or take, that has a very well constructed cabinet, fluid, very textured midrange, extended highs, and nice bass. Keep in mind that I do not like my bass artificially tight. I like my bass to sound full, but not boomy or loose. This fullness keeps the woody quality of an upright string bass intact. All too often, I have heard the bass wrung dry and sound listless. My main source of pleasure is jazz music, although I do listen to a wide variety. hmmm... Id say keep it around $1000 or below and open to new or used. |
|
Bronze Member Username: GavdawgPost Number: 21 Registered: Nov-06 | Im debating on making a trip to my paradigm dealer to see what is new on the horizon... |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1314 Registered: Apr-05 | I have a pair of the Aperion Satelite speakers in our bedroom hooked up to an amp and CD player both from Rotel plus a BA sub. for the price and what I got our of it, I was extremely impressed. Then again our bedroom is relatively small and doesn't need much to fill it up. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 4636 Registered: Dec-04 | Gavin, see the studio 20 v4's. |
|
Bronze Member Username: ElevenPittsburgh, PA USA Post Number: 36 Registered: Nov-06 | Stof, are those the 422-LRs? Or some other Aperion bookshelf model? |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1317 Registered: Apr-05 | That's the one. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jorge59Rio de JaneiroBrasil Post Number: 99 Registered: May-05 | Hey Stu, No surprise that a speaker costing $1500/pr (4x the cost of CBM-170SE or 2.5x that of CMT-340SE) delivers more to my ears.... This is no shame to the Ascends. |